I don’t want to change our culture.

I like the fact that in our nation all citizens have the right to participate in the selection of their leaders unless they, themselves, have lost that right by some action of their own, such as violating the law and being in prison. There was a time when many did not have this power through the vote. At one time, only property owners could vote. At another time, Blacks and American Indians could not vote.  Now all citizens have the right.  I don’t want to change our current system of voting, even though I know it is abused by some political machines, its basis is sound.

I like the fact that the laws are to apply to all people. If I get caught speeding, I get a ticket. If my friend, Mr. Murphy, who owns the grocery store is caught speeding, he gets a ticket. Even professional football players get tickets! I know there are some whose wealth and privilege permit them to avoid tickets, the Kennedys come to mind, but such abuse does not make the system wrong, its basis is sound.

I like the fact that all people are given the same rights before the law, to equal treatment in the courts. All can request a trial by a jury of their peers and the poor receive free legal advice.  While any person who follows the news knows that being wealthy, or having wealth and fame (certain football players come to mind) often results in special treatment, this special treatment is against the law of the land. The basic law is sound.

I like the fact that all children receive a free education and that it is possible for a child of the poorest background to attend and receive the highest education that his or her talent, interest and willingness to work permits. It is obvious that some schools are better than others at preparing children for life in our society, but that doesn’t change the basic premise, which is sound.

I like the fact that all citizens have the right to choose what vocation they wish to enter, the only true restrictions being their talent and energy, there being no way, anywhere, of ensuring opportunity. There have been nations in the past, and probably still are, in which the vocation and status of the father determines the vocation and status of his children. Sorry, but I like our current system, which is sound.

I like the fact that our Constitution specifically forbids enacting ex post facto laws and laws designed to punish specific individuals. This is under current attack in Congress as they seek to punish officials of AIG for accepting the bonuses that Congress itself authorized. I hope this fails. I don’t want my local County Council or State Government to decide that I should have paid more taxes than the legal ones I have already paid and confiscate my home in reprisal. Sorry, I like our current, constitutional, laws, which are sound. 

I like the fact that I can attend, or not attend, any church without punishment, the only coercion being that employed by family members and friends.  I am a Christian and approve of Christianity, which has given us the current culture and laws under which we live, but this same culture permits people to worship in other systems if they so desire. I may not approve of those, or of segments of those such as the subordination of women to men under Muslim law, but if there are men who need religious justification for this and women who are willing to accept it, why not. It is simply that I have no wish to change the culture which gives me, and them, the power to worship as we please.

Why would I wish to change our culture? What culture on earth is better? The implementation of laws written in accord with our culture have their flaws, as illustrated by the sorry arrogance of some members of Congress, but to the extent they reflect our culture, they are good. Why change them? Why change our culture?

Does it give the Obama Maniacs any pause for thought that Fidel Castro, who has led Cuba into dictatorship and poverty, and Hugo Chavez, who is working diligently to do the same for Venezuela have been praising Obama’s initiatives?

The Democrats and Republicans, excluding a few Republicans, in the House have passed a bill levying a 90% tax on bonuses given to the unsuccessful leaders of AIG, a bonus which was specifically approved in a bailout bill passed by the Democrats. This is frightening. First the government hands out, then the government punishes for accepting the handout. If this latest bill, which authorizes the punishment of people who obeyed Congressional law, is not challenged and defeated in the courts, what does it mean for the rest of us? Will it be the right of the county council or state government to raise the taxes on my home and twenty-five acres to an unpayable amount and then confiscate my land because I have not paid that money in the past years when I paid in full the taxes they had assessed? Ex Post Facto laws are clearly ruled illegal in our Constitution. You cannot punish a person for a crime which was not a crime when they committed it. This newest Congressional Bill is a clear violation of our Constitutional rights and a threat to all of us.

To date, we, taxpayers, have given 17.4 billion dollars to General Motors and Chrysler. They are now in line to receive 21.6 billion more dollars. Automotive leaders have stated that they may require “considerably more” money. In effect, Congress is requiring taxpayers to pay for automobiles they don’t wish to purchase. The only consolation to those, like me, who drive small, inexpensive cars, is that while we are helping pay for those expensive cars, indirectly increasing the cost of the cars we purchased, the same thing is being done to those who purchased the more expensive Detroit cars. 

I have been watching the mislabeled “Employee Free Choice Act” as it receives Democratic support. There are some, like me, old enough to remember walking by houses to see the blood stains of non-union workers who were attacked by union thugs – union thugs, not necessarily union members. I also recall one of my mother’s friends whose husband, a union machinist, who spoke up criticizing the leadership during a union meeting. He never had employment again. If anyone thinks that some person, paid to increase union membership (perhaps an ACORN thug), is not going to pay attention to someone who publicly documents his desire NOT to join the union in writing, they have little knowledge of either history or human nature. 

Senator Harry Reid, the leader of the Senate, is pushing to have casinos in Nevada included in the “stimulus” bill because they permit, on occasion, non-profit organizations to use their meeting rooms for free. I suspect some interesting accountancy is involved here. First, the casinos can deduct a large amount from their taxes for permitting the “free” use of unused meeting rooms and then they can profit from the money these people spend at their gambling tables and in their restaurants. Now, Senator Reid wishes to give them a few hundred million taxpayer dollars as a reward. This is, of course, only for the public good, although Mr. Reid may receive a few hundreds of thousands of dollars for his campaign funds.

Nancy Pelosi is the most fascinating of our leaders however. In a time of crisis, when our national leaders were under attack, she, as Speaker of the House and third in line for the Presidency, received the right to use military aircraft without charge. The crisis is past, but Speaker Pelosi continues to enjoy weekly or semi-weekly trips from DC to California on these privileged aircraft. She has expanded this usage to include relatives, such as children, grandchildren, nephews, nieces and others. Shouldn’t her friends and relatives be reimbursing the government – known as taxpayers – for the price of first class commercial tickets for this privileged service?

Pelosi also continues to pursue the “fairness” doctrine, hoping to get it passed into law, which is probable considering the heavy Democratic majorities in both House and Senate. It will apply, of course, only to radio at this time, the one media which is open to all political persuasions. Newspapers and television “news” programs which elected President Obama and these Democratic majorities will be immune. My question is, if she successfully muzzles the voice of the people on radio, will she then censor the Internet? 

In the meantime, President Obama continues to do what he does best, romping around the nation, at taxpayer expense, showering praises on himself and raising money for the next election. It is a good thing Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid are running the nation so thoughtfully and so well in his absence. 

If people in business are required to give back money they haven’t earned, how about Congress?

I believe I have figured out why the Democratic Party was so pleased to have Obama nominated for the Presidency. With his looks and charm, he could easily defeat McCain. Then, with a young and inexperienced politician as President, it would ensure that the old line politicians of the Democratic party; including but not restricted to Ms Pelosi, Senator Reid, the Kennedys, Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer could continue to enrich themselves and run the nation at the expense and to the detriment of the working citizens.

The newspapers and television media made a great deal of the “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska (something Governor Palin didn’t request), but I have yet to hear them talk about the multi-million dollar “Train to Poverty,” financed by the taxpayers to bring fools from Los Angeles to Las Vegas. A bill inserted and passed with support of Senator Reid, it will help impoverish people in Los Angeles and bring greater wealth to the casino owners and prostitutes of Las Vegas and greater wealth to Senator Reid, if not directly at least through the gratitude of the profiteers in Las Vegas.  Maybe it should be called the Highway to Hell instead of the Railroad to Poverty.

Most interesting, or should I say dangerous, is the creation of a new agency which will have the job of creating a data bank of all Americans’ medical records which would permit Obama’s minions to compare patients’ medical needs with other aspects of their lives. The Stalinist agency will also have the power to approve/disapprove treatment for persons who are ill and the right to “punish” doctors who treat people who have been disapproved. I suspect that when this takes effect members of ACORN will have all needs cared for quickly, but if I were Rush Limbaugh I would be seriously concerned about having a heart attack or even an in-grown toenail.

Christopher Dodd has done something I approve of – finally. In the “stimulus” package he inserted a provision that CEOs and other top administrators of any companies receiving Congressional charity from workers’ salaries would have a ceiling of one-third their salary on bonuses they received. Better yet, it would be retroactive. Looking for something else, I discovered that the salary of the CEO of Ford had a salary of $2,000,000 and a bonus of $4,000,000. If he had asked for a handout at the same time as GM and Chrysler, he would owe the government $2,666,666. I suspect he is glad he didn’t ask for “help” for Ford. As I read it, this not only applies to GM and Chrysler, but to all of the banks and Wall Street firms that have received government help. I love it!

The New York Times complained about the hypocrisy of Prince Charles flying about in a carbon dioxide spewing jet to talk about the dangers global warming from carbon dioxide emissions. The true hypocrisy is on the part of the New York Times. I have yet to see an article by them on the hypocrisy of Al Gore traveling hundreds of thousands of miles by carbon spewing jets in order to complain of those carbon dioxide emissions – or of the millions of dollars in fees he receives in doing this public “good.” 

I commented on this to my son Stephen, who was standing nearby. He responded by saying that if the government were serious about carbon dioxide admissions they would stop talking about taxing cows and ban all carbonated beverages. Champagne, beer, Perrier, and all soft drinks release large amounts of carbon dioxide as they are consumed, and they are consumed in the billions. Also, these are all luxury and vice products, not necessary to anyone’s health or well-being, but harmful to many. The world can do without them. In this, they differ from cattle which produce beef and dairy, which provided daily nutrition.  If the government chooses not to ban carbonated beverages, then it should pass a high carbon or sin tax per bottle. The tax would cut consumption, thereby reducing real damage done to the atmosphere and simultaneously providing Congress with money for important projects such as Nancy Pelosi’s multi-million dollar save the salt marsh mouse project.

Most interesting recently has been Obama’s proclamation that there will be no increase in taxes for the working class. I can reveal now that he has secret plans to issue a special card to all citizens making less than a hundred thousand dollars a year. When we purchase gasoline, beverages or tobacco or any of the other numerous items that swallow our money, we simply present this card and the higher taxes on these items will be deducted from our bill. If it were otherwise, the poor would again be paying a higher proportion of their income in taxes to the government since a higher percentage of their income goes to gasoline and similar luxuries.